Group 2: Weapon SafeArm Identification

1
Group 2 Weapon Safe/Arm Identification

• Bill Pottratz
• 30 March 2006

2
Group 2 Weapon Safe/Arm Identification

• Purpose
• Develop safety guidelines, that can be endorsed
  by various boards, for certification of unmanned
  system platforms and weapon interfaces
• Issues Addressed
• TLMs/Precepts
• Safety Certification (analysis/testing)
• Design Guidelines

3
Assumptions

• Workgroup recognizes the sufficiency of existing
  STANAG and MIL-STDs for weapon systems
  initiation systems.
• Functional contribution of UV subsystems other
  than the weapon system to the initiation safety
  system constitutes a distributed safety system.
  Thus, these contributing UV subcomponents may be
  safety critical and must be designed, developed
  and maintained appropriately.
• Top level guidelines apply to all types of
  weapons missiles, bombs, guns, directed energy
  devices, non-lethal systems, etc.

4
TLM/Precept Comments

• Delete Results in personnel injury and/or
  equipment damage reference in TLM definitions
• Want to prevent TLM regardless of result

5
Top Level Requirements/Guidelines

• New Unmanned Weapon Systems designs shall comply
  with appropriate design safety requirements of
  the STANAGs/MIL-STDs for initiation systems.
• UMS subsystems contributing to weapon system
  initiation safety system, shall not subvert or
  compromise the independence of weapon system
  safety features.
• Where UMS subsystems other than the weapon system
  contribute to the initiation safety system,
  existing standards and guidelines shall apply to
  these subsystems.
• Unmanned Weapon Systems shall provide safe armed
  status response data to the control station.

6
Top Level Requirements/Guidelines (continued)

• Positive means shall be incorporated to provide
  isolation of arming and firing power until as
  late in the firing sequence as operational
  requirements permit.
• Each weapon/platform shall have unique identifier
  and shall respond only to commands with its
  identifier in the command.
• The launching/arm-enable of weapon systems shall
  require a minimum of 2 independent and unique
  commands in the proper sequence from external
  controller (eg. signals will not originate
  within launch platform, commands shall not be
  modified by system processors or components).
• All commands that initiate hazardous activities
  shall be self-terminating, and upon termination
  shall return the system to known safe state.

7
Lower Level Requirements/Guidelines

• The UMS shall be capable of determining the order
  in which messages were issued. The external
  control device shall incorporate features that
  determine the longest time that undelivered
  messages can exist within the communication
  system.

8
Other Considerations

• Incorporation of a safety device that monitors
  and validates the proper content and sequence of
  messages and the response of the system to the
  messages, and takes appropriate safing and
  notification actions.
• Utilize environmental forces, wherever possible,
  to enable safety features.
• Electronic Logic Functions. Any electronic logic
  related to safety functions performed by the
  distributed UMS initiation safety system shall be
  embedded as firmware or hardware. Firmware
  devices shall not be erasable or alterable by
  credible environments which the UMS would
  otherwise survive.

9
Issues

• Specific guidelines need to be developed for
  different classes of UMS (i.e. air, sea, ground)
  
• Stores Management/Fire Control design safety
  principles need to be integrated into the design
  of the platform

10
Summary

• Existing safety standards need to be applied
  where applicable (e.g. MIL-STD 1901A for rocket
  motor initiation), but specific standards need to
  be developed to address different classes of UMS
  and different types of weapon systems (e.g. guns,
  directed energy, etc )